2026 Threat Assessment Guidelines and Protocols - Shareable (1)

Contra Costa County Office of Education

Threat Assessment

Guidelines and Protocol 2026

Table of Contents 4

DISCLAIMER

4

INTRODUCTION TO THE SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT

4

PREVENTION AND PREPARATION

7

RATIONALE FOR SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT

7

PURPOSE OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

7

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

7

WHAT ARE SCHOOL-BASED THREATS?

7

RESEARCH FROM THE NATIONAL THREAT ASSESSMENT CENTER

8

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

9 9

GUIDANCE FOR SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT ........

BEHAVIORAL THREAT ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT (BTAM) BEST PRACTICE CONSIDERATIONS FOR K–12 SCHOOLS (NASP)

11

SCHOOL CRISIS PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION – THE PREPARE MODEL (NASP)

11

ENHANCING SCHOOL SAFETY USING A THREAT ASSESSMENT MODEL: AN OPERATIONAL GUIDE FOR PREVENTING TARGETED SCHOOL VIOLENCE (NTAC)

12

COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES (CSTAG)

12

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION SUICIDE PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION PROTOCOL

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

2

Table of Contents 13

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION SCHOOLBASED THREAT ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL

13

SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT STEPS

18

OTHER PROCEDURAL CONSIDERATIONS

18

RETENTION AND TRANSFER OF RECORDS

18

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES

19

APPENDICES

19

THREAT ASSESSMENT TEAM MEMBERSHIP LIST

20

THREAT ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLES AND KEY QUESTIONS

21

CSTAG FORMS FOR COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL THREAT ASSESSMENT

45

AUTHORIZATION FOR RELEASE OF PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION

46

SCHOOL-BASED THREAT DOCUMENTATION FORM

47

SCHOOL-BASED THREAT INTERVENTIONS AND CONSEQUENCES

48

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTACTS

49

RELEASE AND EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

3

DISCLAIMER This document does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. The reader and Local Education Agencies (LEAs) are advised to seek independent legal counsel when developing their own threat assessment protocols.

INTRODUCTION TO SCHOOL-BASED THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL In ensuring the safety and well-being of our school communities, the Contra Costa County Office of Education is committed to implementing a comprehensive school-based threat assessment protocol. School-based threat assessment protocols are a critical component of secure school environments where every student, staff member, and visitor feels protected and supported. This protocol is guided by the best practices set forth by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC), and Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG), formerly known as the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines.

The NASP, NTAC, and CSTAG emphasize a proactive approach to threat assessment, focusing on early identification, thorough evaluation, and collaborative intervention to mitigate potential risks. The Contra Costa County Office of Education integrates these principles to effectively address threats, concerns, or behaviors that may jeopardize safety within our school grounds. By employing a multidisciplinary team of trained professionals, including educators, mental health professionals, administrators, and law enforcement where appropriate, we aim to assess and respond to threats in an equitable, objective, and timely manner.

Central to our approach is the balance of safety with the rights and well-being of all individuals involved. Through clear protocols and transparent procedures, we seek to uphold due process while swiftly addressing any potential threat. This policy underscores our commitment to fostering a culture of trust, communication, and vigilance within our school community.

By following best practices in the field of school-based threat assessment and maintaining open communication with stakeholders, we strive to create an environment where all members can thrive academically, socially, and emotionally, free from the fear of violence or harm. Together, we work towards maintaining a safe and supportive environment that promotes learning and growth for everyone. As we continue to refine and implement our school-based threat assessment protocol, we invite feedback and collaboration from all stakeholders to further strengthen our commitment to safety and well-being.

Prevention and Preparation Prevention and preparation are crucial in addressing school-based threats because they proactively address potential risks before they escalate into crises. A proactive approach not only enhances the physical safety of students and staff but also contributes to a more resilient and secure learning environment, ensuring that educational institutions can effectively navigate and respond to challenges with confidence and preparedness.

The following items are key components of preventing and preparing for potential school threats.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

4

Positive School Climate Positive school climate involves fostering a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere where students feel valued and respected. Key elements include strong relationships between students, staff, and families; clear expectations for behavior; and a focus on socialemotional learning. A positive climate can reduce the likelihood of conflicts and behavioral issues, making it easier to identify and address potential threats early on.

Prevention and social–emotional learning (SEL) curricula should include lessons on the following topics that help to promote and sustain safe school climate: diversity and inclusion, emotional regulation, conflict resolution, problem solving skills, bullying prevention, suicide prevention, violence prevention, and reporting concerns. Schools should analyze their data to determine the best prevention and intervention programs needed for their school communities.

Multi-Tiered Systems of Supports (MTSS) A Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) works in conjunction with threat assessment by providing a framework for early identification, intervention, and support for students exhibiting concerning behaviors. MTSS is a data-driven approach that provides varying levels of support based on students' needs and on-going progress monitoring. By implementing MTSS, schools can more effectively identify students who are at risk of academic or behavioral problems and provide timely interventions. This proactive approach helps prevent issues from escalating into more serious threats, as it addresses underlying problems early and supports students' overall well-being. MTSS typically includes three tiers: Tier 1: Universal screening and supports for all students, such as school-wide behavioral expectations and social-emotional learning programs.

Tier 2: Targeted interventions for small groups of students who need additional support.

Tier 3: Intensive, individualized interventions for students with significant needs, which might involve one-on-one support or specialized services.

NTAC and the Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) released Aligning Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management with a Multi-Tiered System of Support: Building a Continuum of Prevention and Intervention in July of 2025. This guide explains how to schools can integrate behavioral threat assessment with MTTSS to improve early intervention before behaviors escalate. Streamline supports across tiers of intervention, ensure equitable support, especially for students with disabilities, and enhance school safety and positive climate. Key strategies schools should integrate include mapping threat responses to MTSS tiers, sharing data systems and teams, staff training, and local needs. School-based threat assessment and MTSS have a unified approach to student wellbeing and school safety.

Multidisciplinary School-Based Threat Assessment Teams School-based threat assessment should be conducted by a team. This team should have expertise in areas such as psychology, education, administration, law enforcement, and social work. Therefore, every school site should form a multidisciplinary team consisting of school personnel (administrators, counselors, school resource officers, and mental health professionals) to evaluate potential threats. Multidisciplinary threat assessment teams should be established and/or renewed at the beginning of each school year to CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

5

prepare for potential threats. Members who have left should be replaced, and roles and contact information should be reviewed at the time of any change in team membership.

Protocols and Procedures Having written school-based threat assessment protocols and/or procedures is important in both prevention and preparing for school-based threats. Implementing threat assessment protocols in schools is crucial for several reasons. First, schoolbased threat assessment helps identify and address potential threats before they escalate into violence. By evaluating and managing risks early, schools can intervene proactively to prevent harmful incidents. These protocols provide a structured approach to ensure the safety of students, staff, and visitors. They help create a secure environment where individuals feel protected and supported. Effective threat assessment fosters a positive school climate by addressing concerns and conflicts constructively. It promotes open communication and builds trust among students, parents, and staff. School-based threat assessments can identify students who may be struggling with mental health issues, allowing for timely support and intervention.

This helps in addressing underlying problems before they lead to more serious issues.

School-based threat assessment involves collaboration among various stakeholders, including school personnel, law enforcement, and mental health professionals. This multidisciplinary approach ensures a comprehensive evaluation of potential threats and appropriate responses. Many jurisdictions have legal requirements for schools to implement threat assessment protocols. Adhering to these requirements helps schools stay compliant and avoid legal repercussions. Lastly, school-based threat assessment protocols can be helpful as they relate to suicide protocols and comprehensive school safety plans.

Training Training in multidisciplinary school-based threat assessment is crucial for schools to ensure a safe and supportive environment for students and staff. By equipping educators and administrators with the skills to identify, evaluate, and address potential threats, schools can proactively prevent and manage situations that might otherwise escalate into violence or harm. This training helps in recognizing early warning signs, fostering a culture of vigilance and communication, and implementing effective intervention strategies. Staff are better able to respond to threats when they are trained. Additionally, there is an overrepresentation of the number of threat assessments conducted with African American, Native American, and Latinx students in addition to students with disabilities. Therefore, it is important to acknowledge and address disproportionality and bias in threat assessment training. Educators should be trained and equipped to understand equity, intersectionality, culture, privilege and discipline practices to combat discrimination, bias, and racism in school-based threat assessment. There should be annual training for all staff about how to recognize and report warning signs of a school-based threat. Staff who are members of the multidisciplinary school-based threat assessment team should receive more specific training in the specific processes of conducting a school-based threat assessment.

Multidisciplinary school-based threat assessment teams should meet at least twice a year to review protocols and training needs specific to their schools.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

6

Rationale for School-Based Threat Assessment Procedures A threat assessment policy and procedure are essential for identifying, evaluating, and mitigating potential risks to the safety of students, staff, and the broader school community. By systematically assessing behaviors that may indicate a threat, schools can intervene early, provide appropriate support, and prevent incidents before they escalate. This proactive approach fosters a safer learning environment, promotes mental health awareness, and ensures that schools are prepared to respond effectively to potential threats while maintaining a focus on the well-being of all individuals involved.

Furthermore, guidelines and protocols provide best practices for staff to follow when faced with instances of school threats. Well-defined protocols help schools and organizations respond appropriately to incidents, reduce ambiguity, and provide a defensible framework in the event of legal challenges. Protocols are needed to mitigate litigation by establishing clear, consistent procedures that demonstrate due diligence in managing potential risks.

PURPOSE OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION’S SCHOOLBASED THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL The Contra Costa County Office of Education provides resources to eighteen school districts across Contra Costa County. This document is one of those resources districts may use when conducting school-based threat assessments. School districts within Contra Costa County are not mandated to follow the protocol within this document, and may choose to develop their own. However, schools operated by the Contra Costa County Office of Education must follow this protocol when conducting a threat assessment.

Background and Context The following section will explore what constitutes a school-based threat, summarize key findings from NTAC, and outline important legal considerations for practitioners.

What are School-Based Threats?

School-based threats refer to any potential or actual danger that poses a risk to the safety and well-being of students, staff, or the educational environment within a school setting. These threats can manifest in various forms, including physical violence, verbal intimidation, psychological harm, or significant property damage. Examples include but are not limited to a student threatening to bring a weapon to school, which can lead to immediate safety concerns and potential harm; online bomb threats, where individuals use digital platforms to threaten campuses, impacting mental health and creating an unsafe environment; and verbal threats, such as direct threats of violence or harm made by a student, which can create fear and disrupt the learning atmosphere.

Research from the National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) The U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) is a division within the Secret Service that conducts research and develops training on preventing targeted violence in the U.S., including targeted violence in schools. They study behaviors and warning signs exhibited by individuals before they commit acts of violence, with the goal of promoting early intervention and prevention strategies. NTAC’s research emphasizes CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

7

that targeted violence is often preventable. By understanding the warning signs (like pathway behaviors and leakage) and fostering a strong reporting culture, communities and schools can take proactive steps to intervene early and protect lives. NTAC key findings include: Pathway to Violence Definition: NTAC defines the "pathway to violence" as a progression of behaviors and decisions that individuals may exhibit as they move toward carrying out a threat. Those who carry out threats do not act impulsively; their actions are typically planned in advance. They often engage in research, preparation, and practice. Many individuals experience personal crises, such as bullying, academic failure, or family problems, during this progression. Recognizing signs along this pathway allows for early intervention before violence occurs.

Leakage. Leakage occurs when an individual intentionally or unintentionally reveals their intent to cause harm, often by making threats, comments, or writings about their plans. Leakage is common among school-based threats; many shared their plans with peers, online, or in journals before acting. Leakage can occur weeks or months before an attack. Encouraging people to take threatening communications seriously and to report them can provide critical opportunities for intervention.

Impact of Reporting. NTAC reports individuals may have known about threats beforehand but did not report it, often due to fear of retaliation, disbelief, or lack of knowledge on what to do. When threats are reported, schools and law enforcement often have successful interventions that prevent violence. Promoting a culture where students and staff feel safe and supported in reporting concerns is vital. Training on how to report and what to look for increases the chances of preventing violence.

Relevant Legal Considerations Legal considerations for school-based threat assessment are vital in ensuring both the safety of the school community and the protection of individual rights. Schools must navigate various laws and regulations, including those related to student privacy, due process, and reporting obligations. Understanding these legal frameworks helps ensure that threat assessment processes are conducted ethically and effectively while minimizing liability for the school and its personnel. Relevant legal considerations schools should be aware of when conducting a threat assessment include: 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech. Students are not entitled to protection when speech reasonably leads school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of, or material interference with school activities, or, alternatively, if speech collides with rights of others to be secure and to be let alone.”

4th Amendment, Unreasonable Search and Seizure. Search generally must be reasonable based on the particular intrusion on a student’s fourth amendment interests against the school’s promotion of legitimate interests.

14th Amendment, Due Process and Equal Protection. Threat assessment and response must comply with students’ rights and not discriminate against students CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

8

on the basis of their inclusion with a protected class.

Tort Claims. Threat assessment and response may create the basis for potential legal claims for damages or other relief.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Schools should consult with legal counsel before disclosing information that is protected by FERPA and/or the California Education Code. Student records may be disclosed under certain circumstances in an emergency if knowledge of the information is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals.

Duty to Warn. Following a serious or substantive threat, the potential victim(s) and their parents must be warned. Physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have a duty to warn. When a patient presents a danger of violence to another, a therapist must use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California (1976) 17 Cal.3d 425). School districts have a duty to warn and school mental health staff have a duty to breach confidentiality with specific and substantive threats.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504. School-based threat assessment is not a special education evaluation. If a threat assessment is conducted with a student with a disability, schools may need to provide the required behavioral supports and accommodations along with due process proceedings for potential discipline.

California Senate Bill 906. Threats of Homicide at School California Education Code section 49390 et seq. provides specific requirements when schools are aware of homicidal threats. This requirements include notification of safe storage of fire harms, and reporting threats or perceived threats to law enforcement.

Guidance for School-Based Threat Assessment The Contra Costa County Office of Education School-Based Threat Assessment Protocol is developed with guidance from the NASP, NTAC, and CSTAG for conducting threat assessments in schools. With and understanding of the relationship between suicide risk assessment and threat assessment, the Contra Costa County Office of Education Suicide Risk Assessment Policy and Protocol is also referenced when needed.

Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (BTAM) Best Practice Considerations for K–12 Schools. The NASP provides guidelines for school-based threat assessment to help educational institutions manage potential threats effectively. The eight steps below outline the critical components to be included in a high-quality BTAM process. a. Team Approach: Threat assessment should be conducted by a multidisciplinary 1. team including administrators, teachers, counselors, and law enforcement if necessary. b.

2. Define Prohibited and Concerning Behaviors: There is a difference between CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

9

3. a. making a threat and posing a threat, keeping in mind that schools serve students with a variety of developmental ages, disabilities, and emotional maturity levels.

Schools should be taught to recognize and report when someone is at risk to self or others.

4. b. Develop a Central Reporting Mechanism. School communities should be aware of what, when, and how to report potential threats, taking into consideration the culture and historical experiences of their school community when developing reporting systems. Various methods for reporting can include directly reporting to a trusted adult, a tip line, a reporting app, email, voice mail, a link on the school/district website to report, and calling 911. It is important to have a confidential option for reporting potential threats.

5. c. Determine the Threshold for Law Enforcement Intervention. A goal and principle of BTAM is to distinguish between making a threat and posing a threat. If an individual makes a threat but it is found to be not true, low level, or transient, meaning no sustained level of threat, then law enforcement will not likely need to be directly involved. If the threat is legitimate and mitigation actions need to be taken, a school resource or law enforcement officer may become engaged in a consultative or direct role to help with the investigation, actions to mitigate risk, or actions that promote interventions and supports. When following BTAM best practices, behavior is not first reported to criminal authorities unless there is imminent risk (i.e., weapon on campus, assault, imminent threat of violence). The first step is to engage the multidisciplinary threat assessment team to conduct a screening, followed by a full threat assessment, if deemed appropriate.

6. d. Establish Assessment Procedures. Use a structured process to evaluate threats, including gathering information about the threat, the student making the threat, and the context in which it was made. Data should be reviewed (e.g., school records, internet activity) and interviews should be conducted. Consider cultural factors that may influence threat assessment and intervention strategies, ensuring sensitivity and inclusiveness. Identify risk factors associated with the student making the threat, such as history of aggression, access to weapons, and mental health concerns. Assess protective factors that may mitigate the risk of violence, such as strong connections to family and positive peer relationships.

Adhere to legal and ethical guidelines throughout the threat assessment process, respecting the rights and privacy of students involved.

7. e. Develop Risk Management Options. The multidisciplinary threat assessment team should consider all data, including risk and protective factors to identify levels of concern (low/medium/high/imminent), which in turn guide the team in directive actions and supports to be taken. Interventions need to focus on building resiliency and protective factors for the subject while also addressing safety concerns. The multidisciplinary threat assessment team should also maintain records of all threat assessments. For threats determined to be of low risk, informal monitoring may be sufficient. For those threats determined to be of moderate, high, or imminent risk, more formalized progress monitoring will need to be implemented, and it is highly recommended that follow-up meetings are scheduled to review progress and responsiveness to interventions and support.

8.f. Create and Promote Safe School Climates. Prevention and mitigation rely on relationships and connectedness amongst students, staff members, and the CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

10

a. community. Individuals must respect, trust, and empower one another to report concerns, and all must feel as if they belong.

9. b. Conduct Training for All Stakeholders. Provide training and ongoing support for school staff on recognizing warning signs of potential violence and implementing the threat assessment process effectively. It is important to ensure the BTAM model is validated and uses a multidisciplinary approach. The model must be standardized yet flexible to meet varying resources. The training should focus on protocols and processes of systematic implementation, biases that can impact decision making, and integrate case studies.

School Crisis Prevention and Intervention – The PREPaRE Model (NASP) The PREPaRE Model. Developed by the NASP, The PREPaRE Model provides best practices for school-employed mental health professionals and other educators as members of school crisis response teams. The PREPaRE model describes crisis response team activities as occurring during the five mission phases of a crisis: (a) prevention (b) protection, (c) mitigation, (d) response, and (e) recovery. It also emphasizes that members of a school crisis response team must be involved in the following hierarchical and sequential set of activities: P—Prevent and prepare for crises R—Reaffirm physical health & welfare, and perceptions of safety & security E—Evaluate psychological trauma risk P—Provide interventions a—and R—Respond to mental health needs E—Examine the effectiveness of crisis preparedness Enhancing School Safety Using a Threat Assessment Model: An Operational Guide for Preventing Targeted School Violence (NTAC) The U.S. Secret Service’s NTAC released the operational guide Enhancing School Safety Using a Threat Assessment Model: An Operational Guide for Preventing Targeted School Violence. This document offers a structured, research-based approach to help schools proactively identify and manage potential threats of violence. Key Components include: 1. Establish a Multidisciplinary Threat Assessment Team: Form a team comprising school staff, administrators, law enforcement, and mental health professionals to oversee the threat assessment process.

2. Define Prohibited and Concerning Behaviors: Clearly outline behaviors that are unacceptable and those that warrant attention, such as threats, bullying, or interest in weapons.

3. Establish and Provide Training on a Central Reporting System: Implement a system for students and staff to report concerns confidentially and ensure all members are trained to use it effectively.

4. Determine the Threshold for Law Enforcement Intervention: Set criteria for when law enforcement should be involved, balancing safety with due process.

5. Establish Assessment Procedures: Develop standardized procedures for evaluating the seriousness of threats, considering factors like motive, means, and opportunity.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

11

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. Develop Risk Management Options: Create strategies to mitigate identified risks, which may include counseling, behavioral interventions, or changes in school policies.

7. Create and Promote a Safe School Climate: Foster an environment that encourages respect, inclusivity, and open communication among students and staff.

8. Provide Training for All Stakeholders: Ensure ongoing education for all school community members on recognizing and responding to potential threats.

Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG) The CSTAG, originally known as the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines, is an evidence-based framework designed to help K-12 schools evaluate and manage threats of violence. Developed by the Virginia Department of Education, CSTAG provides a systematic approach for assessing the seriousness of threats made by students, determining appropriate interventions, and ensuring the safety of the school environment. CSTAG aims to prevent violence by addressing threats early, supporting at-risk students, and fostering a safe and supportive school environment. Key components of CSTAG include: 1. Assessment Procedures: CSTAG outlines a structured process for evaluating threats, including gathering information from various sources, interviewing the student making the threat, and assessing the context and intent behind the threat.

2. Threat Classification: The guidelines help schools classify threats into categories based on their severity and potential for harm. This classification aids in deciding the level of response required.

3. Intervention Strategies: CSTAG emphasizes the development of intervention plans tailored to the specific needs of the student and the situation. This may include counseling, behavioral support, and communication with parents or guardians.

4. Team-Based Approach: The model encourages the formation of a multidisciplinary threat assessment team that includes school administrators, counselors, mental health professionals, and law enforcement if needed. This team collaborates to manage and respond to threats effectively.

5. Documentation and Follow-Up: CSTAG stresses the importance of thorough documentation of the threat assessment process and follow-up actions to ensure ongoing safety and address any underlying issues.

Contra Costa County Office of Education Suicide Prevention and Intervention Protocol Suicide risk assessment and threat assessment are related, but distinct processes that both aim to evaluate and address potential dangers, though their focus differs. As outlined in the Contra Costa County Office of Education’s Suicide Prevention and Intervention Policy and Protocol, suicide risk assessment specifically targets an individual's potential for self-harm, identifying factors such as psychological distress, suicidal ideation, and previous attempts. This evaluation seeks to understand the individual's mental state and the specific circumstances contributing to their risk of suicide. Often, suicide risk assessment is conducted by an individual mental health professional. Different from suicide risk assessment, school-based threat assessment is typically conducted by a team of mental health professionals, administrators, and law enforcement rather than a sole mental health professional. Threat assessment CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

12

encompasses a broader scope, including the evaluation of threats of harm to others or oneself in various contexts, such as school safety. While threat assessments often consider the possibility of suicide as part of a broader risk evaluation, their primary goal is to identify and mitigate risks posed by an individual’s behaviors or statements that suggest an intent to cause harm. Both assessments involve a detailed analysis of risk factors and require careful consideration of the individual's context, but they differ in their focus and application, with suicide risk assessment centering on personal risk of self-harm and threat assessment addressing potential threats in a wider range of scenarios. Please refer to the Contra Costa County Office of Education Suicide Risk Assessment Policy and Protocol for further information.

Contra Costa County Office of Education School-Based Threat Assessment Protocol The Contra Costa County Office of Education has multidisciplinary school-based threat assessment teams that use CSTAG when completing a school-based threat assessment. CSTAG is a systematic approach to evaluating and managing potential threats to safety within an educational environment.

School-Based Threat Assessment Steps. The steps for conducting a school-based threat assessment at the CCCOE are outlined below, and the CSTAG forms included in the appendices. These steps are designed to be flexible and adaptable to the unique circumstances of each situation while still adhering to the CSTAG protocol and best practices for school-based threat assessment. a. Initial report or identification: The process begins when a threat, concerning 1. behavior, or troubling situation is reported or identified. This can come from students, staff, parents, or community members in writing, verbally, or through the CCCOE reporting lines posted on the website. When threats are received via the phone, attempts should be made to keep the caller on the line to gather information about the threat.

CCCOE Staff Actions: The potential threat is reported to the CCCOE site administrator immediately. If the site administrator is not available, the potential threat should be reported to the administrator or designee on duty. The administrator convenes the multidisciplinary threat assessment team. The multidisciplinary threat assessment team notifies the CCCOE Safety Manager of the potential threat. Use the CSTAG Threat Report form in the appendices. a. Evaluate the threat: The multidisciplinary threat-assessment team conducts a 2. thorough assessment of the threat. This includes analyzing the information gathered to understand the nature, severity, and credibility of the threat, as well as the risk it poses to the safety of the school community. This can include interviewing witnesses, reviewing records (academic, disciplinary, medical, etc.), speaking with providers, and gathering other pertinent data. Exact wording CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

13

should be noted. The team exercises cultural competence while evaluating the threat. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 1.

CCCOE Staff Actions: The threat assessment team designates individuals to review data (e.g., disciplinary records, internet activity) and conduct the interviews. This may be the site administrator and/or mental health professional working in collaboration (e.g., school psychologist, school social worker). The threat assessment team uses the CSTAG forms in the appendices for Assessment Findings, Interviews, and Observations to evaluate the threat. If needed, the mental health professional will also conduct a suicide risk screening using the CCCOE Suicide Prevention and Intervention Protocol.

3. Decide whether the threat is transient or substantive. Consider criteria for transient versus substantive threats or no threat at all. Consider student’s age, credibility, and previous history. Transient threats are often rhetorical remarks or temporary expressions of anger or frustration. Substantive threats are ones that pose at least some risk that the student will carry out the threat, evidenced by the expressed intent to injure someone beyond the immediate situation.

Indicators of substantive threats include a specific plan (verbal or written), a threat that has been repeated over time, or the recruitment of an accomplice or accomplices. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 1.

Staff Actions: The threat assessment team should reach a consensus for the threat classification. If consensus cannot be reached, staff will operate based on the highest possible threat classification. For threats that are transient, refer to CCCOE Step 4. For threats that are unclear of substantive, refer to CCCOE Step 5. Document the threat classification in the CSTAG forms in the appendices.

4. Respond to a transient threat. Staff will determine interventions appropriate to the student. This can include family/caregiver notification, consequences, and/or formal discipline. The student may be required to make amends (e.g., restorative practices), be offered counseling, or be referred for other supports. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 2. Cases of transient threats may be considered resolved once these steps are taken, but should still be documented.

Staff Actions: The threat assessment team will consider programs available inside or outside of the school setting to refer the student for participation. Administrators will reference applicable education code to determine if applicable discipline is necessary. See the appendices for suggested interventions. Use the CSTAG Observations Suggesting Need for Intervention and Threat Response in the appendices. Notify individuals indicated in the threat. Log this intervention in the CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

14

student information system, Aeries.

5. Respond to a substantive threat is serious or very serious. Serious means a threat to hit, fight, or beat up whereas very serious means a threat to kill, rape, or cause very serious injury with a weapon. Take immediate action to respond to the threat, including notifications to potential victims and their families, precautions to protect potential victims, and notification to the family/caregivers of the student making the threat. Contact law enforcement immediately for a very serious threat. Look for ways to resolve conflict. Provide intervention, consequences, and/or discipline as appropriate. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 3.

Staff Actions: The threat assessment team immediately notifies law enforcement. Separate and supervise the student as appropriate until law enforcement responds. Enact any other safety CCCOE safety protocols (e.g., lockdown, evacuation, etc.). Notify the potential victim and their family. Once the imminent threat has been stabilized, the threat assessment team determines appropriate interventions available at their school site, and the administrator determines appropriate consequences or discipline taking into consideration the nature of the incident and education code. Use the CSTAG Observations Suggesting Need for Intervention, Threat Response, and Case Plan in the appendices. Log this intervention in the Student Information System, Aeries.

6. Conduct a safety evaluation and develop a safety plan. For threats that are very serious, in addition to the steps above, the student may require a mental health needs determination and law enforcement investigation. Develop a safety plan that reduces risk and addresses student needs. Plans should include review of Individual Educational Plan if already receiving special education services and/or further assessment if a disability is suspected. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 4.

Staff Actions: The threat assessment team conducts a mental health assessment. The purpose of the mental health assessment is to maintain the safety and well-being of the student and others. Therefore, the assessment has two objectives. The first objective is treatment and referral needs. Assess the student’s present mental state and determine whether there are urgent mental health needs that require attention, such as risk of suicide, psychosis, or rage. Beyond these immediate needs, consider whether there are other treatment, referral, or support needs.

The second objective is threat reduction. Gather information on the student’s motives and intentions in making the threat to understand why the threat was made and identify relevant strategies or interventions that have the potential to reduce the risk of violence. Use the CSTAG Mental Health Assessment in the appendices. Log this intervention in the student information system, Aeries.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

15

7. Monitor and revise a safety plan: Monitor and revise the safety plan as needed to ensure the effectiveness of interventions and to reassess the threat over time.

Maintain contact with the student. This ongoing monitoring helps to determine if additional actions are needed or if the threat has been mitigated. This step corresponds to CSTAG Step 5.

Staff Actions: The threat assessment team should stay in communication with the family/caregiver and law enforcement. Develop a safety plan. Releases for exchange of information, located in the appendices, may need to be signed to communicate with outside providers. The threat assessment team should meet on a regular basis to determine the effectiveness of the interventions, make changes, or discontinue the plan once the threat has been minimized. At a minimum, the safety plan should be reviewed at the two day, one-week, and two-week mark to begin. It should then be reviewed monthly for one year.

8. Documentation: Throughout the process, thorough documentation is essential.

This includes documenting the initial report, assessment findings, interventions implemented, and outcomes. Documentation helps to track the progress of the threat assessment and ensures accountability.

After the threat assessment has been conducted, staff will complete the threat assessment documentation form in the appendices. Staff will verify that an authorization for release of health information was completed during the student’s intake prior to storing this form in the student record. If there is no authorization for release, staff will contact the parent or guardian to complete one. If the parent does not consent to an authorization, staff will contact their administrator.

Once an authorization for release of health information is verified, the threat assessment documentation form will be logged in Aeries under Student Date>Other>Student Documents. When uploading a student document, use the following guidance: 1. Date: The date of the risk assessment 2. Document Name: STUDENT NAME_Risk Assessment_DATE (e.g., 3. ConnieCosta_Risk Assessment_5.23.2023) 4. Category: 02 Personal Documents 5. Sub Category: Blank 6. Related to: CNF (Counseling) 7. Locked: Blank, Not checked

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

16

Aeries user permissions are set so that only mental health providers and administrators have access to the threat assessment documentation form. CSTAG forms completed by the threat assessment team are stored by mental health clinicians.

Follow-Up and Support: Following the resolution of the immediate threat, ongoing support may be provided to those involved, including students, staff, and the wider school community. This support helps to address any lingering concerns or effects of the incident.

The threat assessment team should develop support for individuals and the school community that foster resilience and healing. Staff will consider counseling services for affected students and staff, trauma-informed care, and opportunities for open dialogue from the community to address fears and concerns. The threat assessment team should consult with CCCOE central office administrators (e.g., communications department, program directors, mental health officers) to determine these supports.

Debrief. Evaluate the effectiveness of the school-based threat assessment response and identify areas for improvement. Discuss the actions taken, the outcomes observed, and any challenges encountered. By reflecting on the incident, multidisciplinary threat-assessment teams can enhance their protocols, ensure all members are aligned in their understanding, and reinforce communication strategies. Additionally, debriefing provides an opportunity to support team members emotionally, as these situations can be stressful.

Debriefing helps strengthen the school’s capacity to manage future threats effectively and fosters a culture of continuous improvement.

The multidisciplinary threat assessment team should meet and review the threat assessment response within one week following the date the school-based threat assessment was conducted. Check for fidelity of team participation, quality assessment, adherence to the CSTAG protocol, timely notifications to law enforcement, potential victims, and family/caregivers of the student making the threat, intervention and consequence appropriateness, and completed documentation. Identify what went well and areas to improve. Making changes necessary for any future occurrences.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

17

Other Procedural Considerations. When a threat assessment involves issues such as bullying, Title IX concerns, or special education needs, school administrators must ensure that appropriate parallel processes are initiated in addition to the threat assessment itself. For example, if bullying is a factor, the school’s anti-bullying policy should be activated to investigate and respond accordingly. If the case includes allegations of sexual harassment or discrimination, the school must follow Title IX procedures, including notifying the Title IX coordinator and ensuring a prompt, fair, and impartial investigation. When the student involved has an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or 504 Plan, administrators must ensure compliance with IDEA or Section 504 regulations, including considering how the student’s disability may relate to their behavior and determining whether a Manifestation Determination Review (MDR) is required. Coordinating these processes ensures that the student’s rights are protected while maintaining school safety, and it underscores the importance of collaboration between administrators, counselors, special education staff, and legal advisors.

Retention and Transfer of Records. Threat assessment records will be maintained in accordance with school policy and applicable laws. These records may be transferred to another educational institution when a student enrolls elsewhere, or released to authorized parties with a valid release of information. All records are subject to record retention and destruction policies as required by federal and state law, including FERPA and relevant local regulations, to ensure the proper handling, confidentiality, and disposal of sensitive information.

References and Resources Contra Costa County Office of Education consulted school-based mental health professionals and administrators in the development of this protocol. It underwent legal review from Contra Costa County Office of Education counsel and local law enforcement. Additionally, this school-based threat assessment protocol was reviewed

by Safe and Sound Schools. This school-based threat assessment protocol is grounded in best practice outlined in the documents and resources below: Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG), 2nd Edition National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (BTAM) Best Practice Considerations for K–12 Schools National Center for School Safety School Crisis Prevention and Intervention The PREPaRE Model, 2nd Edition Enhancing School Safety Using a Threat Assessment Model, National Threat Assessment Center Aligning Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management with a Multi-Tiered System of Support, National Threat Assessment Center and Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and & Supports

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

18

Appendix A Threat Assessment Team Membership List Name

Role

Agency

Phone #

Email

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

19

Appendix B Threat Assessment Principles and Key Questions The threat assessment process is guided by six principles and 11 key questions concerning the student’s motives, capability, and risk factors. These principles and key questions are summarized in the table below from NASP’s School Crisis Prevention and Intervention, 2nd Edition.

Principles: 1.a. Targeted violence is the result of an understandable, and often discernible, process of thinking and behavior.

2.b. Targeted violence stems from an interaction among the person, the situation, the setting, and the target. c.

3. An investigative, skeptical, inquisitive mind-set is critical to successful threat assessment. d.

4. Effective threat assessment is based on facts rather than characteristics or “traits.”

5.e. An “integrated systems approach” should guide threat assessment investigations.

6.f. The central question of a threat assessment is whether a student poses a threat, not whether the student made a threat.

Key Questions to Ask Regarding the Student Making the Threat 1.a. What are the student’s motive(s) and goals?

2.b. Has there been any communications suggesting ideas or intent to attack?

3.c. Has the subject shown inappropriate interest in weapons (including recent acquisition or any relevant weapon) or incidents of mass violence (terrorism, workplace violence, mass murders) 4.d. Has the student engaged in attack-related behaviors?

5.e. Does the student have the capacity to carry out an act of targeted violence?

6.f. Is the student’s conversation and “story” consistent with his or her actions?

7.g. Are other people concerned about the student’s potential for violence?

8.h. What circumstances might support the likelihood of an attack?

Note: From Threat Assessment in Schools: A Guide to Managing Threatening Situations and to Creating Safe School Climates, pp. 30-32, 55-57, by R.A. Fein et al., 2004, Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. This document is in the public domain.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

20

Appendix C Forms for the Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines What is the purpose of these forms?

These forms are used to conduct a threat assessment, as explained in the manual, Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines: Intervention and Support to Prevent Violence[1], or other training resources.

Do I conduct a threat assessment for all threats?

No. It is not feasible or necessary to conduct a formal assessment for clearly insignificant behavior such as playful bantering or joking. Conduct a threat assessment if there is some reason to be concerned about the behavior. When in doubt about a threat, conduct a threat assessment.

Do I use all of these forms for every threat assessment case?

No. Transient cases are documented with only a few pages (Threat Report, Interview(s), Key Observations, Threat Response), whereas only very serious substantive threats are likely to use all of the forms. In large samples, approximately 75% of cases are transient and fewer than 10% are very serious substantive threats.

Do I complete every section of each form?

No. These forms are intended as guidelines to help you consider the most likely aspects of a case, but you will use your judgment as to what is appropriate for your assessment and intervention.

Who completes the forms?

Threat assessment is a team process and can be documented by any member of the team. A transient threat might be handled by just one team member (preferably in consultation with at least one other team member), whereas a substantive threat will likely engage several team members. In general, the whole team should be kept informed and might have input on any case.

Can I modify these forms?

Yes, within reasonable limits that do not significantly alter the CSTAG process. Be sure that changes are approved by your school system. Some school systems will modify the terminology (e.g., ‘safety screening’ rather than “mental health assessment”) or make other adjustments. For example, some schools systems add a place to document who carries out each step of the assessment or add a form to track changes when a student receives ongoing services. Schools can use online versions of these forms, too.

If a threat is resolved, do I change the threat classification to “no threat”?

No. The threat classification documents the process you followed and guides your next steps, regardless of how the threat is resolved. Occasionally, the threat classification might change if you find, for example, that a transient case is more serious than you thought and should be changed to a substantive threat. Document this change with the date and reasons for it. The resolution of a threat should be recorded in the Case Plan section.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

21

Should I document transient threats?

Yes. If a student later carries out a threat that was previously judged to be transient, you will want documentation to show that you made a defensible effort to assess the threat.

If a student makes multiple threats, documentation will provide a useful perspective.

Where should I file these forms?

Follow the guidance of your school system to determine where you file records. Some school systems choose to file some or all of the threat assessment forms in the student’s educational record and others choose to file some or all of the forms outside of the educational record. Any information placed in the student’s educational record is subject to FERPA restrictions.

[1] The manual is available from School Threat Assessment Consultants LLC at https://www.schoolta.com/manual and from Amazon.com. These forms are available for school use only, and cannot be resold or used in unauthorized formats or systems.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

22

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

23

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

24

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

25

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

26

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

27

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

28

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

29

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

30

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

31

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

32

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

33

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

34

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

35

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

36

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

37

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

38

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

39

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

40

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

41

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

42

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

43

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

44

Appendix D Authorization for Release of Protected Health Information By completing this form you are authorizing the Contra Costa County Office of Education (CCCOE) to release your student’s protected health information identified herein to the persons or entities identified below.

The protected health information subject to this waiver is limited to: School-Based Threat Assessment Documentation Form The persons or entities the protected health information shall be disclosed to: Administrators and mental health providers employed by schools within the jurisdiction of CCCOE The purposes for which the protected health information shall be used include: Ensuring CCCOE staff followed necessary assessment protocols.

I understand that by signing this authorization: I authorize the use and/or disclosure of my student’s individually identifiable health information as described above for the purpose listed. I understand that this authorization is voluntary.

I have the right to revoke this authorization at any time by sending a signed notice stopping this authorization to Contra Costa County Office of Education Student Programs at 77 Santa Barbara Road, Pleasant Hill, CA 94597. The authorization will cease on the date my valid revocation request is received.

An individual may revoke an authorization at any time, provided that the revocation is in writing, except to the extent that: The covered entity has taken action in reliance thereon; or if the authorization was obtained as a condition of obtaining insurance coverage.

Under California law, the recipient of my student’s medical information is prohibited from redisclosing the information, except with a written authorization or as specifically required or permitted by law.

If the organization or person I have authorized to receive the information is not a health plan or health care provider; the released information may no longer be protected by federal privacy regulations.

I have the right to receive a copy of this authorization.

I understand that signing this waiver is not consent to a special education assessment, nor is a school-based threat assessment an assessment for special education eligibility and services This authorization for release of the above information to the above named persons or organizations will expire on: ____________ (date).

Name Printed

Name of Student(s)

Signature

Date

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

45

Appendix E School-Based Threat Assessment Documentation Form This form is completed by the threat assessment team. A copy of this form is uploaded to Aeries following the record keeping guidelines outlined in the School-Based Threat Assessment Policy and Protocol.

Date of Threat Assessment: Student Name:

Date of Birth:

Age:

School:

Grade:

Threat Assessment Team Members:

Name & Title: Name & Title: Name & Title: Name & Title: Name & Title: Name & Title:

Was CSTAG used?

YES

What was the level of risk determined?

Transient

Was law enforcement contacted?

Date: _________ Time: Agency:__________________ Officer: __________________________

YES

NO

Was the administrator notified?

Date:__________ Time:___________ Method:­­____________

YES

NO

Was the school psychologist, social worker, or counselor notified?

Date: _____________ Time: _________ Method:__________

YES

NO

Was the parent/guardian/caregiver notified?

Date: _____________ Time: __________ Method: ________

YES

NO

Was the student taken from campus for further evaluation or support?

If yes, by whom? ___________________________

YES

NO

Was the CCCOE central office notified?

Date: _____________ Time: ____________ Method: _____________________

YES

NO

Were school-based interventions developed to support the student?

YES

NO

Was a safety plan developed?

If the student left campus before a safety plan or resources could be provided, will this be put in place upon their return?

YES YES

NO NO

NO Serious

Very Serious

*Possible discipline information related to this incident can be found in the student information system, Aeries.

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

46

Appendix F School-Based Threat Interventions and Consequences Most of these possible interventions are taken from the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (BTAM) Best Practice Considerations for K–12 Schools. These interventions and consequences are offered as possibilities to threat assessment teams, but are not mandatory. There may be additional interventions and consequences for individual students and schools.

Consequences & Discipline Letter of apology • Conflict resolution • Warning • Behavior contract • Parent meeting • Nocontact agreement

Alternatives to suspension • Detention • Suspension • Habitually disruptive plan • Expulsion

▪

Law enforcement actions: Restraining order Ticketed Charges filed Diversion program Court issued protective orders

▪

▪

▪

▪

Monitoring Check-in, check-out • Searches • Safety contract • Adult monitoring • Adult escorts from class to class • Modify daily schedule to increase monitoring opportunities • Restrictions

No-contact agreement • Modify school start/ending time • Increase monitoring collaboration between school and parent/guardian • Parent/guardian will increase supervision • Monitor for precipitating events (i.e., anniversaries, losses, perceived injustice)

Ongoing collaboration with agency supports, probation/juvenile diversion, mental health professionals • Detained, incarcerated, or placed under intensive supervision

Skills Development/Resiliency Building Academic supports • Conflict resolution • Anger management • Social skills group • SEL curriculum

Increase engagement in school activities • Increase engagement in community activities • Provide feedback and mentoring

Engage in leadership activities • Decrease isolation • Monitor reactions to grievances, precipitating events and provide supports

Additional Interventions Revise IEP/504 plan • Intervention team referral • Change in transportation • Restorative justice practices

Evaluation, psychiatric or psychological • Special education assessment • Change of placement to access more intensive services

McKinney-Vento/foster care referral • Social service referral

Environment Address systemic, procedural, or policy problems that may serve as precipitating events Build a caring and supportive climate and culture • Implement effective threat and suicide assessment • De-escalation training for staff

Enhance social–emotional learning to include: Bullying prevention Violence prevention Suicide prevention Emotional regulation Conflict management Sexual harassment prevention Digital citizenship • Ensure positive dynamics among staff (modeling for students)

▪

▪ ▪

▪

▪

▪ ▪

Early intervention with emerging problems • Explicitly teach about confidential reporting procedures • Give permission to “break the code of silence” and get help for a peer who is struggling

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

47

Appendix G Contra Costa County Law Enforcement Contact Information

Antioch Police Department

925-779-6900

Brentwood Police Department

925-634-6911

Concord Police Department

925-671-3220

Contra Costa Sheriff - Martinez

925-313-2500

Contra Costa Sheriff- Alamo

925-837-2902

Contra Costa Sheriff- Brentwood

925-608-8370

Contra Costa Sheriff- Richmond

510-262-4203

Danville Police Department

925-314-3700

Lafayette Police Department

925-283-3680

Martinez Police Department

925-372-3440

Moraga Police Department

925-888-7055

Oakley Police Department

925-625-8855

Orinda Police Department

925-254-6820

Pittsburg Police Department

925-252-4980

Pleasant Hill City Police Department

925-288-4600

Pleasanton Police Department

925-931-5100

Richmond Police Department

510-233-1214

San Ramon Police Department

925-973-2700

Walnut Creek Police Department

925-943-5100

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

48

CCCOE THREAT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES AND PROTOCOL

2026

49